CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
5.5/10
1.2 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Agrega una trama en tu idiomaA marriage counselor becomes possessed by a demon of sexuality when her father-in-law, an archaeologist and an exorcist, accidentally frees it while in Africa.A marriage counselor becomes possessed by a demon of sexuality when her father-in-law, an archaeologist and an exorcist, accidentally frees it while in Africa.A marriage counselor becomes possessed by a demon of sexuality when her father-in-law, an archaeologist and an exorcist, accidentally frees it while in Africa.
William P. Bradford
- Dr. Rogers
- (as Billy Bradford)
Charles Broaddus
- Joe
- (as Chuck Broadus)
Opinión destacada
Do not doubt this film's fabulousness. Doubt its credibility, maybe, but not its sheer power to amuse. But this posting is here to dispel some misinformation, not to review the movie. Suffice it to say, if you have a sense of irony and don't need MST3K to tell you what's funny, you'll enjoy it. About four scenes were taken directly from THE EXORCIST, but there were about a dozen movies that were much more derivative.
Actually, Warner Brothers lost their lawsuit in '78, but AIP didn't rerelease it out of fear of WB's corporate muscle, and because the EXORCIST craze was basically over with. I sometimes wonder if WB would have sued someone who was (or claimed to be) actually possessed during this period, as they seemed to think they had possession itself copyrighted. Listen closely: WB did not, and could not, order all prints destroyed. The movie simply went into limbo. It has been doing very well on bootleg video, and if the copyright holders (formerly AIP) wished to do so, they could find a good print and put it out on video legitamately, and rake in the dough.
Actually, Warner Brothers lost their lawsuit in '78, but AIP didn't rerelease it out of fear of WB's corporate muscle, and because the EXORCIST craze was basically over with. I sometimes wonder if WB would have sued someone who was (or claimed to be) actually possessed during this period, as they seemed to think they had possession itself copyrighted. Listen closely: WB did not, and could not, order all prints destroyed. The movie simply went into limbo. It has been doing very well on bootleg video, and if the copyright holders (formerly AIP) wished to do so, they could find a good print and put it out on video legitamately, and rake in the dough.
- z0mb0y
- 16 ago 2000
- Enlace permanente
Argumento
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaThis film has been out of circulation in the U.S. for several years (even to the extent that it has never been officially released on home video in any form in the U.S. to this day) after Warner Bros. sued American International Pictures, claiming that it was a ripoff of their film, El exorcista (1973). Although the film was very profitable for AIP (its budget was approx. $200,000 and it earned $4 million in its first month of release), its producer/director William Girdler never saw one cent of the profits due to the lawsuit, which was finally settled shortly before his death in 1978; however, it turned out to be too little, too late as far as the film was concerned.
- Citas
The Demon's voice: I don't need you! I've got Abby!
- ConexionesFeatured in Mansfield 66/67 (2017)
- Bandas sonorasMy Soul Is A Witness
Written and Performed by Carol Speed
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Abby?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 400,000 (estimado)
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 29 minutos
- Color
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
By what name was Seducción diabólica (1974) officially released in India in English?
Responda